Number of Siblings, Birth Order and Their Impacts on Individual Cooperativeness in Adulthood: An Experimental Study among Buryats of Eastern Siberia

 
PIIS086954150012356-1-1
DOI10.31857/S086954150012356-1
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Affiliation: Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: 32a Leninsky prospekt, Moscow, 119991, Russia
Affiliation: Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: 32a Leninsky prospekt, Moscow, 119991, Russia
Affiliation: Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: 32a Leninsky prospekt, Moscow, 119991, Russia
Affiliation: East-Siberian State Institute of Culture (VSGIK)
Address: 1 Tereshkova Str., Ulan-Ude, 670031, Russia
Journal nameEtnograficheskoe obozrenie
Edition№5
Pages162-184
Abstract

In the current study, we have investigated individual cooperativeness and its association with parameters of the family composition among Buryats of Eastern Siberia. The experimental design was based on economic games (“Public Goods Game”, “Prisoner’s Dilemma”), which allowed quantitative assessment of individual cooperativeness. The results have shown that Buryat men originating from larger families (≥ 4 children in a family) were more cooperative in group interactions, whereas men that were the single child in a family demonstrated self-oriented behavior. Among females, cooperative behavior was principally influenced by the position among the siblings: Buryat women who were the first child in a family (elder sisters) were the less cooperative ones. The outcome of the study demonstrates that socialization within the family has a significant impact on formation of individual and sex-specific differences in pro-social attitudes in adult ages.

Keywordscooperation, altruism, children, family, siblings, Buryats, Public Goods Game, Prisoner’s Dilemma, social evolution, economic games
AcknowledgmentThis research was supported by the following institutions and grants: Russian Science Foundation, https://doi.org/10.13039/501100006769 [grant no. 18-18-00075]
Publication date28.12.2020
Number of characters43037
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.
Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной
1 Социальность является неотъемлемой характеристикой Homo sapiens. Несмотря на то что человек признан “гиперкооперативным” видом, на сегодняшний день известно об индивидуальных различиях людей в склонности к просоциальному поведению (Ростовцева, Бутовская 2018; Peysakhovich et al. 2014; Volk et al. 2012; Yamagishi et al. 2013). Это означает, что, в общем, одни люди более склонны вести себя просоциально и альтруистично, в то время как другие проявляют склонность к эгоистичному поведению. При этом индивидуальные предрасположенности характеризуются значительной стабильностью (особенно во взрослом возрасте), т.е. с большой долей вероятности проявляются в различных ситуациях на протяжении продолжительных жизненных периодов человека. Основные естественные стратегии кооперативного поведения, выделяемые многими исследователями, включают альтруистичное поведение (т.е. безвозмездную кооперацию), условную кооперацию (напр., взаимную), а также эгоизм. К эгоизму относят и применение стратегии обмана, и непосредственно эгоистичную стратегию, т.е. нежелание делиться, помогать, вступать в кооперативные отношения (Ростовцева, Бутовская 2017; Fischbacher et al. 2001; Kurzban, Houser 2005; Fischbacher et al. 2012). Множество антропологических исследований, проводившихся в различных странах как в современных доиндустриальных обществах (Henrich et al. 2004, 2005; Soler 2012; Gerkey et al. 2013; Ensminger, Henrich 2014; Thomas et al. 2016; Butovskaya et al. 2020), так и в обществах с высоким уровнем индустриализации и урбанизации (см. обзоры: Balliet et al. 2011; Dorrough, Glöckner 2019), показывают, что во всех без исключения культурах сосуществуют просоциальные и эгоистичные стратегии поведения человека.
2 Индивидуальные различия в поведении формируются у человека под действием множества социальных, культурных и биологических факторов. Исследование особенностей просоциального поведения, а также причин наблюдаемых индивидуальных различий представляют большую ценность для понимания механизмов функционирования социальной системы человека и эволюции социальности как таковой (Кропоткин 1907; Ростовцева 2015, 2016; Эфроимсон 1971; Nowak 2006; Silk, Boyd 2010; Jaeggi, Gurven 2013).
3 Окружающая среда влияет на формирование личности и поведенческих предрасположенностей на всех стадиях индивидуального развития, но особое место в этом процессе занимает период детства. Это связано с тем, что наиболее прочные базовые нейронные связи в мозгу образуются на ранних этапах жизни, и далее на всем ее протяжении прочность таких связей обеспечивает сохранность приобретенного опыта (Yang et al. 2009). Такие “знания” составляют, подчас неосознанный, каркас человеческой личности. Интересно, что предрасположенность к реакции на какую-либо информацию и ее запоминание в раннем возрасте задаются уже существующими к моменту рождения структурами мозга (нейронными паттернами), которые, наряду с набором физиологических особенностей, определяются генетическими и пренатальными факторами (Марков 2011: 89–100; Robinson, Smotherman 1991). Таким образом, формирование базовых индивидуальных предрасположенностей к определенному поведению – это результат сложного процесса взаимодействия генов и окружающей среды.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 941

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Ahmedova, L.A. 2000. Osobennosti formirovaniia lichnosti v mnogodetnoi sem’e [Features of Personality Formation in a Large Family]. Yuridicheskaia mysl’ 4: 76–81.

2. Angerer, S., D. Glätzle-Rützler, P. Lergetporer, and M. Sutter. 2015. Donations, Risk Attitudes and Time Preferences: A Study on Altruism in Primary School Children. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 115: 67–74. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2014.10.007

3. Balliet, D., N.P. Li, S.J. Macfarlan, and M. van Vugt. 2011. Sex Differences in Cooperation: A Meta-Analytic Review of Social Dilemmas. Psychological Bulletin 137 (6): 881–909. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025354.

4. Basaeva, K.D. 1980. Sem’ia i brak u buriat (vtoraia polovina XIX – nachalo XX veka) [Family and Marriage among Buryats (Second Part of the 19th – Beginning of the 20th Century]. Novosibirsk: Nauka.

5. Basaeva, K.D. 2004. Sem’ia i semeinye otnosheniia [Family and Family Relations]. In Buriaty [Buryats], edited by L.L. Abaeva and N.L. Zhukovskaya, 181–186. Moscow: Nauka.

6. Basaeva, K.D. 2004. Traditsii i obriady, sviazannye s rozhdeniem i vospitaniem detei [Traditions and Ceremonies Related to Birth and Parenting]. In Buriaty [Buryats], edited by L.L. Abaeva and N.L. Zhukovskaya, 186–193. Moscow: Nauka.

7. Basaeva, K.D. 2004. Sem’ia i semeinyi byt v XIX v. [Family and Family Life in 19th Century]. In Buriaty [Buryats], edited by L.L. Abaeva and N.L. Zhukovskaya, 200–207. Moscow: Nauka.

8. Batueva, I.B. 1989. Skotovodstvo v sisteme traditsionnogo hoziaistva buriat [Cattle Breeding in the System of Traditional Buryat Economy]. In Buriatiia XVII – nachala XX vv. Ekonomika i social’no-kul’turnye processy [Buryatia 17th – Beginning of 20th Centuries: Economy and Socio-Cultural Processes]. Novosibirsk. Nauka.

9. Bichurin, N.Y. 1950. Sobranie svedenii o narodah, obitavshih v Srednei Azii v drevnie vremena. T. 1 [Collection of Evidence on the People Inhabiting Middle East in Ancient Times. Vol. 1]. Moscow: Institut Etnografii im. Mikluho-Maklaia.

10. Bird, R. 1999. Cooperation and Conflict: The Behavioral Ecology of the Sexual Division of Labor. Evolutionary Anthropology 8 (2): 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1002/ (SICI)1520-6505(1999)8:23.0.CO;2-3

11. Bowles, S. 2009. Did Warfare Among Ancestral Hunter-Gatherers Affect the Evolution of Human Social Behaviors? Science 324 (5932): 1293–1298. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1168112

12. Buiantueva, G.Ts.D. 2016. K voprosu vospitaniia detei v buriatskoi sem’e [To the Children Education in a Modern Buryat Family]. Vestnik Buriatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta: gumanitarnye issledovaniia Vnutrennei Azii 3: 67–71.

13. Butovskaya, M., et al. 2020. Approach to Resource Management and Physical Strength Predict Differences in Helping: Evidence from Two Small-Scale Societies. Frontiers in Psychology 11: 373. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00373

14. Butovskaya, M.L., and E.Y. Boyko. 2001. Roditel’skii favoritizm i osobennosti formirovaniia stilei povedeniia u detei v zavisimosti ot poriadka rozhdeniia: biosocial’nye aspekty [Parental Favoritism and Formation of Specific Behavior Patterns of Children Depending on Their Birth Order: Biosocial Aspects]. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie 6: 67–81.

15. Butovskaya, M.L., E.Y. Boyko, and E.B. Guchinova. 2004. Poriadok rozhdeniia i priviazannost’ k rodstvennikam: kross-kul’turnyi analiz [Birth Order and Attachment to Relatives: Cross-Cultural Analysis]. Arheologiia, etnografiia i antropologiia Evrazii 2 (18): 134–143.

16. Chakars, M. 2014. The Socialist Way of Life in Siberia: Transformation in Buryatia. Budapest: Central European University Press.

17. Dambaeva, A.N. 2012. Traditsionnaia sistema vospitaniia u buriat [Traditional Buryat Education System]. Vestnik Buriatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta 15: 120–124.

18. Darhanova, A.I. 2009. Klassifikatsiia sovremennyh buriatskih shamanov [Classification of Modern Buryat Shamans]. Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta: Istoriia, Filologiia 8 (5): 293–299.

19. David-Barrett, T., et al. 2015. Women Favour Dyadic Relationships, but Men Prefer Clubs: Cross-Cultural Evidence from Social Networking. PloS ONE 10 (3): e0118329. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118329

20. Dorrough, A.R., and A. Glöckner. 2019. A Cross‐National Analysis of Sex Differences in Prisoner’s Dilemma Games. British Journal of Social Psychology 58 (1): 225–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12287

21. Dugarova, T. 2010. Osobennosti etnicheskogo samosoznaniia buriat [Features of Buryat Ethnic Identity]. Etnopsihologiia 1: 225–238.

22. Eder, D., and M.T. Hallinan. 1978. Sex Differences in Children’s Friendships. American Sociological Review 43 (2): 237–250. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094701

23. Efroimson, V.P. 1971. Rodoslovnaia al’truizma [Pedigree of Altruism]. Novyi mir 10: 57–65.

24. Ensminger, J., and J. Henrich, eds. 2014. Experimenting with Social Norms: Fairness and Punishment in Cross-Cultural Perspective. New York.: Russell Sage Foundation.

25. Fehr, E., D. Glätzle-Rützler, and M. Sutter. 2013. The Development of Egalitarianism, Altruism, Spite and Parochialism in Childhood and Adolescence. European Economic Review 64: 369–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2013.09.006

26. Fischbacher, U., S. Gächter, and E. Fehr. 2001. Are People Conditionally Cooperative? Evidence from a Public Goods Experiment. Economics Letters 71 (3): 397–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1765 (01)00394-9

27. Fischbacher, U., S. Gächter, and S. Quercia. 2012. The Behavioral Validity of the Strategy Method in Public Good Experiments. Journal of Economic Psychology 33: 897–913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2012.04.002

28. Franzen, A., and S. Pointner. 2013. The External Validity of Giving in the Dictator Game. Experimental Economics 16 (2): 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-012-9337-5

29. Gelcich, S., et al. 2013. Exploring External Validity of Common Pool Resource Experiments: Insights from Artisanal Benthic Fisheries in Chile. Ecology and Society 18 (3): 26269337.

30. Gerkey, D., et al. 2013. Cooperation in Context: Public Goods Games and Post-Soviet Collectives in Kamchatka, Russia. Current Anthropology 54 (2): 144–176.

31. Gintis, H. 2000. Game Theory Evolving: A Problem-Centered Introduction to Modeling Strategic Interaction. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

32. Girchenko, V.P. 1928. K istorii buriat-mongolov-horintsev pervoi poloviny XIX veka [To the History of Buryat-Mongol-Khorins of the First Part of the 19th Century]. Verhneudinsk: Gostipografiia NKPT.

33. Gurko, T.A., and N.A. Orlova. 2011. Razvitie lichnosti podrostkov v razlichnyh tipah semei [The Development of the Personality of Adolescents in Various Types of Families]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia 10: 99–107.

34. Harbaugh, W.T., and K. Krause. 2000. Children’s Altruism in Public Good and Dictator Experiments. Economic Inquiry 38 (1): 95–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.2000.tb00006.x

35. Henrich, J., et al., eds. 2004. Foundations of Human Sociality: Economic Experiments and Ethnographic Evidence from Fifteen Small-Scale Societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

36. Henrich, J., et al. 2005. “Economic Man” in Cross-Cultural Perspective: Behavioral Experiments in 15 Small-Scale Societies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (6): 795–815. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X05000142

37. Herbst, D., and A. Mas. 2015. Peer Effects on Worker Output in the Laboratory Generalize to the Field. Science 350 (6260): 545–549. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac9555

38. Humphrey, C. 1989. Population Trends, Ethnicity and Religion among the Buryats. In: The Development of Siberia, edited by A. Wood and R.A. French, 147–176. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20378-9_8

39. Jaeggi, A.V., and M. Gurven. 2013. Natural Cooperators: Food Sharing in Humans and Other Primates. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 22 (4): 186–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.21364

40. Kashima, Y., et al. 1995. Culture, Gender, and Self: A Perspective from Individualism-Collectivism Research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69 (5): 925–937. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.925

41. Khangalov, M.N. 1958. Obshchestvennye okhoty u severnykh buriat [Collective Hunting of Northern Buryats]. In Sobranie sochinenii: V 3 t. T. 1 [Collected Works, 3 vols. Vol. 1], 33–95. Ulan-Ude: Buriatskoe knizhnoe izdatel’stvo.

42. Khangalov, M.N. 1958. Molochnoe hoziaistvo u buriat [Dairy Farming of Buryats]. In Sobranie sochinenii: V 3 t. T. 1 [Collected Works, 3 vols. Vol. 1], 226–252. Ulan-Ude: Buriatskoe knizhnoe izdatel’stvo.

43. Khangalov, M.N. 1959. Nizhneudinskie buriaty (etnograficheskie zametki) [Buryats of Nizhneudinsk (Ethnographic Assays)]. In Sobranie sochinenii: V 3 t. T. 2 [Collected Works, 3 vols. Vol. 1], 15–48. Ulan-Ude: Buriatskoe knizhnoe izdatel’stvo.

44. Khangalov, M.N. 1959. Obosinskie taezhnye ohotniki [Obosinsky Taiga Hunters]. In Sobranie sochinenii: V 3 t. T. 2 [Collected Works, 3 vols. Vol. 2], 48–56. Ulan-Ude: Buriatskoe knizhnoe izdatel’stvo.

45. Khangalov, M.N. 1960. Sobranie sochinenii: V 3 t. T. 3 [Collected Works, 3 vols. Vol. 3]. Ulan-Ude: Buriatskoe knizhnoe izdatel’stvo.

46. Haptaev, P.T. 1984. Sovremennyi byt i etnokul’turnye protsessy v Buriatii [Modern Life, Ethnic and Cultural Processes in Buriatia]. Novosibirsk: Nauka.

47. Kudriavtsev, F.A. 1940. Istoriia buriat-mongol’skogo naroda s XVII v. do 60-h godov XIX v. [The History of Buryat-Mongol People from the 17th Century Till 60th of the 19th Century]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR.

48. Kurzban, R., and D. Houser. 2005. Experiments Investigating Cooperative Types in Humans: A Complement to Evolutionary Theory and Simulations. PNAS 102 (5): 1803–1807. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0408759102

49. Kropotkin, P.A. 1907. Vzaimnaia pomoshch’, kak faktor evoliutsii [Mutual Help as a Factor of Evolution]. St. Petersburg: Znanie.

50. Lagoida, N.G. 2008. Izuchenie istorii sem’i i ee znachenie dlia sovremennoi molodezhi [Research on the History of Family and Its Value for Modern Young People]. Vestnik Buriatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta: Obrazovanie; Lichnost’; Obshchestvo 5: 225–232.

51. Ledyard, J.O. 1994. Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research. In Handbook of Experimental Economics, edited by J. Kagel and A. Roth, 111–194. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

52. Linhovoin, L.L. 1972. Zametki o dorevolutsionnom byte aginskih Buriat [Notes on the Pre-Revolutionary Life of the Agin Buryats]. Ulan-Ude: BKIZ.

53. Mansheev, D.M. 2009. Forms of Nomadism and Livestock Management of the Eastern Sayan Buryats in the Late 19th and Early 20th Centuries. Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 37 (2): 104–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeae.2009.08.005

54. Markov, A.V. 2011. Evoliutsiia cheloveka. Kn. 2, Obez’iany, neirony i dusha [Human Evolution. Bk. 2, Apes, Neurons, and Soul]. Moscow: Astrel’.

55. Maynard Smith, J. 1982. Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

56. McDonald, M.M., C.D. Navarrete, and M. van Vugt. 2012. Evolution and the Psychology of Intergroup Conflict: The Male Warrior Hypothesis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 367 (1589): 670–679. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0301

57. Micheletti, A.J.C., G.D. Ruxton, and A. Gardner. 2018. Why War Is a Man’s Game. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 285: 20180975. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.0975

58. Muhina, V., and T. Dugarova. 2010. Mental’nye osobennosti sovremennyh buriat Rossii [Mental Features of Modern Buryats of Russia]. Razvitie lichnosti 2: 164–175.

59. Murdock, G.P., C. Provost. 1973. Factors in the Division of Labor by Sex: A Cross-Cultural Analysis. Ethnology 12 (2): 203–225. https://doi.org/10.2307/3773347

60. Nash, J. 1951. Non-Cooperative Games. Annals of Mathematics 54 (2): 286–295. https://doi.org/10.2307/1969529

61. Newyear, T. 2009. “Our Primitive Customs” and “Lord Kalym”: The Evolving Buryat Discourse on Bride Price, 1880–1930. Inner Asia 11 (1): 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1163/000000009793066596

62. Nowak, M.A. 2006. Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation. Science 314 (5805): 1560–1563. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1133755

63. Ochirov, V.O. 2012. Muzhchina-otets i ego rol’ v buriatskoi sem’e [Man-Father and His Role in Buryat Family]. Vestnik Cheliabinskoi gosudarstvennoi akademii kul’tury i iskusstv 3 (31): 84–86.

64. Pan, L., D. Hao, Z. Rong, and T. Zhou. 2015. Zero-Determinant Strategies in Iterated Public Goods Game. Scientific Reports 5: 13096. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep13096

65. Peysakhovich, A., M.A. Nowak, and D.G. Rand. 2014. Humans Display a “Cooperative Phenotype” That is Domain General and Temporally Stable. Nature Communications 5 (1): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5939

66. Rapoport, A., A.M. Chammah, and C.J. Orwant. 1965. Prisoner’s Dilemma: A Study in Conflict and Cooperation. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.

67. Robinson, S.R., and W.P. Smotherman. 1991. Fetal Learning: Implications for the Development of Kin Recognition. In Kin Recognition, edited by P.G. Hepper, 308–334. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

68. Rzaeva, ZH.V., and S.G. Stepacheva. 2018. Osobennosti obshchikh empatiinyh tendentsii u studentov iz mnogodetnyh semei [General Empathic Tendencies’ Features Among Students from Large Families]. In Aktual’nye problemy sovershenstvovaniia vysshego obrazovaniia: materialy konferentsii [Actual Problems of Improving Higher Education: Conference Materials], 562–563. Yaroslavl: Yaroslavskii gosudarstvennyi universitet.

69. Rostovtseva, V.V. 2015. Obshchebiologicheskie osnovy al’truizma [General Biological Bases of Altruism]. Chelovek 5: 30–42.

70. Rostovtseva, V.V. 2016. Al’truizm s chelovecheskim litsom [Human Altruism: Conceptual Review]. Chelovek 1: 17–29.

71. Rostovtseva, V.V., and M.L. Butovskaya. 2017. Biosocial’nye mekhanizmy kooperativnogo povedeniia u muzhchin (na primere russkih i buriat) [Biosocial Mechanisms of Cooperativeness in Men (Study in Buryats and Russians)]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriia 23, Antropologiia 4: 107–188.

72. Rostovtseva, V.V., and M.L. Butovskaya. 2018. Social’noe dominirovanie, agressiia i pal’tsevoi indeks (2D:4D) v kooperativnom povedenii molodyh muzhchin [Social Dominance, Aggression, and Finger Index (2D:4D) in Cooperative Behavior of Young Men]. Voprosy psihologii 4: 65–80.

73. Salmon, С.А. 1998. On the Impact of Sex and Birth Order on Contact with Kin. Human Nature 10 (2): 183–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-999-1014-9

74. Salmon, С.А., and М. Daly. 1998. Birth Order and Familial Sentiment: Middleborns are Different. Evolution and Human Behavior 19: 299–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138 (98)00022-1

75. Silina, E.A. 2013. Lichnostnye osobennosti detei iz mnogodetnyh i odnodetnyh semei [Personality Features of Children from Large and One-Child Families]. Fundamental’nye issledovaniia 8 (5): 1243–1246.

76. Silk, J.B., and R. Boyd. 2010. From Grooming to Giving Blood: The Origins of Human Altruism. In Mind the Gap, edited by P.M. Kappeler and J. Silk, 223–244. Berlin: Springer.

77. Soler, M. 2012. Costly Signaling, Ritual and Cooperation: Evidence from Candomblé, an Afro-Brazilian Religion. Evolution and Human Behavior 33 (4): 346–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.11.004

78. Sparks, A., T. Burleigh, and P. Barclay. 2016. We Can See Inside: Accurate Prediction of Prisoner’s Dilemma Decisions in Announced Games Following a Face-To-Face Interaction. Evolution and Human Behavior 37 (3): 210–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.11.003

79. Sulloway, F.J. 1995. Birth Order and Evolutionary Psychology: А Meta-Analytic Overview. Psychological Inquiry 6: 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0601_15

80. Thomas, M.G., et al. 2016. Smaller Saami Herding Groups Cooperate More in a Public Goods Experiment. Human Ecology 44 (5): 633–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-016-9848-3

81. Tregubova, D.D. 2009. Mesto i rol’ rodoplemennoi identifikatsii v soznanii sovremennyh buriat [Place and Role of the Tribal Identification in the Consciousness of Modern Buryats]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriia 8, Istoriia 1: 77–81.

82. Tsoktoeva, R.Y. 2012. Struktura buriatskoi patriarhal’noi sem’i i transformatsiia vnutrisemeinyh sviazei v sovremennoi kul’ture buriat [The Structure of Buryat Patriarchal Family and Transformation of Within-Family Relation in Modern Buryat Culture]. Vestnik Buriatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta 6: 248–251.

83. van den Berg, P., and F.J. Weissing. 2015. Evolutionary Game Theory and Personality. In Evolutionary Perspectives on Social Psychology, edited by V. Zeigler-Hill, L.L.M. Welling, and T.K. Shackelford, 451–463. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12697-5_34

84. van Vugt, M. 2009. Sex Differences in Intergroup Competition, Aggression, and Warfare: The Male Warrior Hypothesis. Annals of New York Academy of Sciences 1167 (1): 124–134.

85. Vasilieva, M.S. 1998. Etnicheskaia pedagogika buriat [Ethnic Pedagogy of Buryats]. Ulan-Ude: Izdaiel’stvo Buriatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta.

86. Vishnevskii, A.G. 2014. Demograficheskaia revoliutsiia meniaet reproduktivnuiu strategiiu vida Homo sapiens [Demographic Revolution Changes Reproductive Strategy of the Homo sapiens Species]. Demograficheskoe obozrenie 1: 6–33.

87. Volk, S., C. Thöni, and W. Ruigrok. 2012. Temporal Stability and Psychological Foundations of Cooperation Preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 81 (2): 664–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2011.10.006

88. Viatkina, K.V. 1969. Ocherki kul’tury i byta Buriat [Essays on Cultural Life of Buryats]. Leningrad: Nauka.

89. Yamagishi, T., et al. 2013. Is Behavioral Pro-Sociality Game-Specific? Pro-Social Preference and Expectations of Pro-Sociality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 120 (2): 260–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.06.002

90. Yang, G., F. Pan, and W.B. Gan. 2009. Stably Maintained Dendritic Spines are Associated with Lifelong Memories. Nature 462 (7275): 920–924. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08577

91. Zamuraeva, P.B. 2014. Istoriko-kul’turnye i normativno-pravovye faktory formirovaniia gendernyh otnoshenii v traditsionnoi kul’ture buriat vtoroi poloviny XVIII – nachala XIX vv. [Historical, Cultural, and Regulatory Factors of Gender Relations Formation in Traditional Buryat Culture of the Second Part of the 18th – Beginning of the 19th Centuries]. Vestnik Zabaikal’skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta: istoriia i arheologiia 2 (105): 3–8.

92. Zhambalova, S.G. 2004. Skotovodstvo [Pastoralism]. In Buriaty [Buryats], edited by L.L. Abaeva and N.L. Zhukovskaya, 93–105. Moscow: Nauka.

93. Zhambalova, S.G. 2004. Ohota [Hunting]. In Buriaty [Buryats], edited by L.L. Abaeva and N.L. Zhukovskaya, 105–114. Moscow: Nauka.

94. Zhukovskaya, N.L. 2008. Buddizm i shamanizm kak faktory formirovaniia buriatskogo mentaliteta [Buddhism and Shamanism as Factors of Buryat Mentality Formation]. In Religiia v istorii i kul’ture mongoloiazychnyh narodov Rossii [Religion in the History and Culture Mongolian-Speaking Peoples of Russia], 9–36. Moscow: Vostochnaia literatura.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up